- CR3 Listener 2007-07-16 - By FredrikJ
Back
I just upgraded to CR3 and found out that the CacheListener interface has been
removed in favor for the annotationbased listener.
Some gripes:
1. Wouldn't this be considered a major api change(?) and as such should not go
in between two cr releases?
2. I understand that the benefit is that you can choose to declare only those
listener methods you are interested of, thus reducing the amount of empty
boilerplate listener methods. However, the downpart is that we are losing type
safety here and I personally do not consider this a good bargain.
>From the documentation we can read:
anonymous wrote : Methods annotated as such need to be public, have a void
return type, and accept a single parameter of type org.jboss.cache
.notifications.event.Event or one of it's subtypes.
Now, isn't this exactly why we have interfaces? An interface enforces signature
and types. If we fail to honor the interface we get a nice compilation error,
with the annotation based model we will get runtime checking and runtime errors
.
If we look at the list of available annotations here http://labs.jboss.com/file
-access/default/members/jbosscache/freezone/docs/2.0.0.CR3/JBossCache-UserGuide
/en/html_single/index.html#api.listener we can see that the input ot the methods
differ. Now I have to switch between my IDE and the documentation to lookup the
annotation and what the proper signature is. Should I fail to comply, my IDE
will not tell me since there is no compile-time checking.
Furthermore, since there is no longer a CacheListener interface, I cannot use
that interface for listener-registration in layers created on top of the cache,
forcing me either into allowing Object or creating my own Listener interface
which will allow me at least some typesafety. But in the end I will never
really know until the cache is started and every possible listener has been
registered to the cache, right?
Generally I'm not opposed annotations. I think they do fill a purpose, but I
can't seem understand the reasons for this particular design decision.
View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic
&p=4064522#4064522
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode
=reply&p=4064522
__ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
jboss-user mailing list
jboss-user@(protected)
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-user
|
|
